From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tobias Getzner Subject: =?UTF-8?B?UmU6IMKrTWFjcm/CuyBleHBhbnNpb24gaW4gc291cmNlIGJsb2Nr?= =?UTF-8?B?czsgY29kZS1zaGFyaW5nIGJldHdlZW4gYmxvY2tz?= Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 14:40:55 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <87bnqdqb7i.fsf@ucl.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36137) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XUctn-0004iT-4Y for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 10:41:38 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XUctf-0005Ld-Gn for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 10:41:31 -0400 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:34270) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XUctf-0005KH-AU for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 10:41:23 -0400 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XUctR-00027r-7F for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 16:41:09 +0200 Received: from g228190172.adsl.alicedsl.de ([92.228.190.172]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 16:41:09 +0200 Received: from tobias.getzner by g228190172.adsl.alicedsl.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 16:41:09 +0200 List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org On Thu, 18 Sep 2014 15:01:37 +0100, Eric S Fraga wrote: >>> Are there any convenient inline-expansion methods I might have >>> overlooked? > Org src blocks can reference other src blocks. Note the ":noweb yes" > option and the use of <<...>>. Nice! And I see I get «semantic» expansion when I add call syntax after the block’s name. This is quite awesome. Not being familiar with the term, «noweb» must have slipped my attention when I was skimming through that section. Thanks very much for the pointer! Best, T.